Archived: Bridge House

Updated 4 May 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Before the inspection we checked the information we held about the service. This included any notifications and safeguarding alerts. We also contacted the local borough contracts and commissioning teams that had placements at the home, the local Healthwatch and the local borough safeguarding team. Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector, a mental health specialist and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

During our inspection we observed how the staff interacted with people who used the service and also looked at people’s bedrooms and bathrooms with their permission. We spoke with six people who lived in the service during the inspection. We spoke with the registered manager, two of the directors, the deputy manager, and one support worker. We looked at seven care files, staff duty rosters, four staff files, a range of audits, minutes for various meetings, three medicines records, two finances records, accidents and incidents, training information, safeguarding information, complaints log, health and safety folder, and policies and procedures for the service.

Updated 4 May 2016

We inspected Bridge House on 19 April 2016. This was an unannounced inspection. When the service was last inspected in June 2014 there were no breaches of the legal requirements identified.

The service provides accommodation and support with personal care for up to 13 adults with mental health conditions. At the time of our inspection 11 people were using the service.

There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The experiences of people who lived at the home were positive. People told us they felt safe living at the home, staff were kind and the care they received was good. We found staff had a good understanding of their responsibility with regard to safeguarding adults.

People’s needs were assessed and their preferences identified as much as possible across all aspects of their care. Risks were identified and plans in place to monitor and reduce risks. People had access to relevant health professionals when they needed them. Medicines were stored and administered safely.

Staff undertook training and received regular supervision to help support them to provide effective care. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). MCA and DoLS is law protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves or whom the state has decided their liberty needs to be deprived in their own best interests. We saw people were able to choose what they ate and drank. People had access to health care professionals as appropriate.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff employed by the service. Staff had been recruited safely with appropriate checks on their backgrounds completed.

People’s needs were met in a personalised manner. We found that care plans were in place which included information about how to meet a person’s individual and assessed needs. The service had a complaints procedure in place.

Staff told us the service had an open and inclusive atmosphere and the registered manager was approachable and open. The service had various quality assurance and monitoring mechanisms in place.